Talk:The Hidden Case of Ewan Forbes

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that The Hidden Case of Ewan Forbes discusses the history of trans man Ewan Forbes and his 1968 legal case to inherit his family's baronet title that was silenced from public records? Source: "So when he was old enough, and about to get married, he had his birth certificate changed to reflect his status as a trans man. Then Ewan’s older brother died, and as a member of an aristocratic Scottish family, he was next in line to become Sir Ewan Forbes of Craigievar." and "Ewan’s case, which was decided in 1968, remained secret for decades, its potential impact on transgender rights unacknowledged until recently." (The Landmark Trans Case That Got Hushed Up for Decades - The Daily Beast)

• Reviewed: Second circle of hell
• Comment: The article was moved from draftspace to mainspace in this edit.

Created by Silver seren (talk). Self-nominated at 20:14, 27 November 2021 (UTC).

• New enough in mainspace and long enough. QPQ present. The case is fascinating and so is the article. Various citations cover the hook source material, and the hook fact is quite interesting (it got my attention immediately!). No textual issues. Good to go. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P5

Novel and contentious claims in the book should be caveated

It should be made clear that the speculation eg. that physical evidence was forged and that the testicular samples were fraudulently obtained is just speculation.

Playdon's assertions that trans people were able to change their birth certificate on demand should be caveated as assertions by the author. This assertion is contrary to the established law which was that birth certificates could only be changed in the event of an actual error. On page 213 Playdon claims: "that self-declaration of their ‘psychological sex’ was the only valid criteria for deciding trans people’s legal sex". This is in contrast to the opinion of Lord Hunter which is the exact opposite: "I am far from saying, to take an example, that a finding that the psychological sex of an individual was male would ever justify a conclusion that a person was legally a male". Hence, Forbes changed his birth certificate to correct it on the grounds of an unidentified intersex condition, and provided physical evidence to that fact when it was brought into dispute. Void if removed (talk) 11:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

The article already notes that "Prior to that decade, trans individuals were considered a subset of intersex conditions, but psychiatrists pushed in the 1960s for being transgender to be labeled as a mental illness.". And, sorry, but no, there's no indication in the sources that Forbes was a non-trans intersex person. As the sources discuss, they only had secondary male sex characteristics from the usage of hormone therapy. And the doctors found no evidence of testicular tissue existing on Forbes and the collection of the tissue was done entirely on his own without anyone else involved. As the sources note. And Playdon specifically goes into detail that when not involved in major legal cases, the changing of one's birth certificate at the time wasn't something that was disputed, hence why it could be done on one's own. But once called into legal question, such as by the cousin, then the change had to be physically done. You are using unrelated opinion and SYNTH to push your claims on actual past events. The book goes over all of this in extreme detail. Silverseren^C 18:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Moved lede discussion to separate section. Void if removed (talk) 11:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The lede should not state the case was about "being transgender"

The phrasing of the lede is inappropriate. Whatever Playdon's interpretation of events, at the time there was no question that the case was about "being transgender". The case was about Ewan Forbes' change of sex on his birth certificate and whether he really was male or actually female. Ewan won on the grounds of being considered intersex, not transsexual, and that his original birth certificate was truly in error. The wording should be changed from "the 1968 legal case he was involved in regarding being transgender" to "the 1968 legal dispute over a change of sex on his birth certificate", or alternatively it could be worded "the 1968 legal dispute which called into question his sex". Void if removed (talk) 11:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Another alternative: "the 1968 legal dispute which called into question his sex and consequent eligibility to inherit his baronet title" Void if removed (talk) 11:25, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Another suggested alternative: "the 1968 legal dispute which called into question his sex and consequent eligibility to inherit his baronet title. Zoë Playdon calls into question the previous determination that Forbes was intersex, and advances the alternative theory that Forbes was in reality transsexual." This makes it clear what the book is about, using the language of the book itself. Void if removed (talk) 18:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

It seems that "transgender" is the term sourced in The Hidden Case, and that the the alternatives presented here are based on an editor's interpretation of primary sources. Are there any WP:RS supporting alternative language? Newimpartial (talk) 18:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

"Transgender" does not appear in the book until chapter 11. By contrast, the first description of the case in the introduction, on page 9 states it is about "the correction of his birth certificate in 1952", "a legal wrangle about him inheriting his primogeniture baronetcy", and that "On the face of it, Ewan was 'intersex' [...] not what was then called 'transsexual'". Void if removed (talk) 20:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

(It's literally the subtitle of the book: The Transgender Trial that Threatened to Upend the British Establishment) Silverseren^C 20:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Depends on the edition - an alternative subtitle is "And the Unwritten History of the Trans Experience". Void if removed (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Regardless, both subtitles are in the lede, the point is not to repeat them, but to describe the contents clearly. The actual text establishes the nature of the trial early on in the terms I have described and they are more explanatory than reiterating the subtitle. Void if removed (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2021 (UTC)